Study of Live Lecture Attendance, Student Perceptions and Expectations

Abstract

Declining lecture attendance has been an ongoing concern for educators involved in undergraduate medical education. A survey was developed (a) to gain insight into the reasons students skipped class, (b) to identify the type of study materials they were using, and (c) to determine what they thought would motivate them to come to class. The survey was sent to 317 first-year and second-year medical students, and 145 (45%) responded. Only 63% of first-year students and 53% of second-year students attended any lectures that were not mandatory. The attendance was higher for students who aspired to less competitive specialties such as pediatrics and family medicine. The most popular reasons for not coming to class were related to the efficiency of information intake and instructor or class style. The most heavily used resources (> 60%) were materials or recorded lectures provided by the instructor. The second-year students also heavily used outside study materials for Board exams, such as Pathoma (50%). Students' ideas for what might increase their attendance suggest that they perceive that the lectures may not prepare them for Board exams, and they would like faculty to address Board related content more often in class and on assessments. Respondents also suggested that teaching practices might be improved through faculty development. Faculty awareness of and references to Board exam content, embedded in strong teaching practices, may help students find more value in live lectures. Carefully designed active learning sessions may change students' minds regarding the relevance and value of these sessions.

Supplementary information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40670-021-01236-8.

Keywords: Active learning; Attendance; Lecture; Medical student; Pre-clinical; Undergraduate medical education.

Fig. 1

Percent (95% confidence intervals) of students who attended some or all non-mandatory lectures by intended specialty. Across all students, the mean attendance of some or all non-mandatory lectures was 61%

Fig. 2

Percent (95% confidence intervals) for first-year and second-year) respondents regarding reasons to miss class. *Difference between first-year and second-year p ≤ 0.01

Fig. 3

Percent (95% confidence intervals) for first-year and second-year respondents regarding resources used outside of class. Differences between first-year and second-year students were not directly compared in the statistical analysis

Fig. 4

Percent (95% confidence intervals) for first-year and second-year respondents regarding changes that might encourage class attendance. Differences between first-year and second-year students were not statistically analyzed